JUDICIAL BENCHMARKS: HEARINGS ON DC'S GUN BAN

 

District of Columbia v. Heller, a Supreme Court case that will be decided

in the next few months, will determine whether "the People" mentioned in

our Constitution really means "the Government" when it comes to the right

to keep and bear arms. The Justices heard arguments last Tuesday.

 

The Second Amendment to the Constitution states: "A well regulated Militia,

being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to

keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Using the arguments posited by

attorneys for the District of Columbia, this really means only the militia

should be armed, not the people. Of course, this argument ignores the plain

language of the Amendment, the historical context of the word "militia" (every

able-bodied adult male) and several hundred years of practice and precedent.

 

For more than 30 years, DC has banned all handguns, the cheapest and most

common weapon of self-defense, and requires homeowners to either disassemble

or unload and lock up all other firearms. The (un)reasonableness of a total

ban on handguns, however, is just one of many questions the Court will decide

in this landmark case. In the hearing, it seemed the Justices understand

the right belongs to individuals, leaving the question as what constitutes

reasonable regulation.

 

As the NRA-ILA reports, 31 state attorneys general, many former senior DOJ

officials, and Congress have filed amicus briefs opposing DC's position in

the case. "The congressional brief had the largest number of co-signers

of a congressional amicus brief in American history," the NRA-ILA said,

"with 250 House Members, 55 Senators and the Vice President of the United

States, acting in his capacity as President of the Senate." Perhaps the most

encouraging sign came during the hearings last Tuesday when Justice Anthony

Kennedy said, "[T]here's a general right to bear arms quite without reference

to the militia either way." It appears the "swing" Justice may have his head

on straight for this one. After all, it is clear that this case dealing with

what former Justice Joseph Story called the "palladium of the liberties of

a republic" is one of utmost importance to our nation.